What are your thoughts on this
-
-
@The-Big-G She’s absolutely right. Feminism is all about empowering women until a woman identifies as submissive and then every other woman wants to stop her from being true to herself because it’s not about empowerment so much as conforming to a new standard. Western society (actually all society as far as I know) has tried to force women into a stereotype of virginity and purity for centuries. Women comfortable with their sexuality get labels that have no male equivalent: “slut” “tramp” “bimbo” “skank” etc. The funniest part of it is that the virgin stereotype actually promotes the patriarchy because it gives men complete control of sexuality and the real reason that 90% of men will never admit is that most men are terrified of female sexuality. So instead of learning to control their own sexuality they blame women for controlling it.
Years ago I was a bouncer in strip clubs. Now I make kinky adult videos. For years I’ve said that the sight of a woman’s body has lost the ability to get my heart racing. Now, take that body, lay it out on my bed, fill it with an interesting intelligent person, turn down the lights and put on some good music and you’ll get the reaction you want, but it’s situational these days. I’ve seen topless women walking around New York City and the state of Hawaii where it’s legal and I can appreciate the view of course, but without walking into traffic.
Modern feminism has allied itself with the patriarchy instead of working to dismantle it.
-
While I think the Sabrina Carpenter cover thing is not the best example to talk about a woman’s expression of their sexuality etc. (because is she? Or does she want to promote her music? Maybe, maybe not, it’s certainly got us talking about it), it’s opened up a much-needed discussion around “choice feminism” more broadly, i.e. the re-focussing (distracting, even) on the individual level rather than the systemic.
Here’s a snippet of a lecture that I saw the other day that gives some historical context https://vt.tiktok.com/ZSkKVJVUx/
-
…Huh. I’m not exactly looking for these arguments, for obvious reasons, but when I do see it the logic isn’t, ‘A woman doing this is corrupting someone because her body is EEEEVILLLL’ or whatever, it’s ‘a woman exposing herself like this is degrading herself and/or is doing this for/because of men’.
Like, I don’t doubt there’s people who say that, but it’s just not a tact I’m used to seeing.
For the record, the idea that women’s bodies have to be covered and hidden is stupid, and following through that logic means that men are horny animals with no control and something should be done about that since clearly there’s no self control possible. Which… is also stupid, but strangely enough I’ve never seen that argument come up.
-
The tension here is between an individual (if influential) woman expressing her sexuality (and, yes, selling her album) as she sees fit and a sexist society that prioritizes the male gaze and normalizes male dominance. There is no easy resolution of this tension; everyone has to weigh individual expression against social obligation every day in every aspect of their lives.
The second wave feminist argument is that Carpenter’s choices not only affect Carpenter but everyone exposed to those choices. Third wave feminists will claim that Carpenter is owning her sexuality, including an expression of submission.
These two poles are much less helpful at the extremes; the Marxist analysis assigns too little agency to individuals, whereas “choice” feminism assigns too much. No one “chooses their choice” in a vacuum, but each of us can transcend our historical and class circumstances to make decisions for ourselves.
The feminist objection to Carpenter’s image is not that it is sexual but that it reinforces a very specific vision of heterosexual relations. Second wavers will argue that Carpenter has an obligation not to celebrate sexual submission because both men and women will necessarily see it as an endorsement of male supremacy. Third wavers will deny that Carpenter has any such obligation.
In my opinion we are each responsible for what we put into the world, regardless of our intentions. Any human expression has the potential to have unintended consequences, but that does not mean that we should stop expressing ourselves.
-
Jude Doyle goes into much greater detail and has some important insights here.
This Is How You Lose the Sex Wars
Trying to pick a pathway through forty years of the ugliest conflict in feminism.
All my M/f stories and discussions can be found here.
-
@Olo said:
Jude Doyle goes into much greater detail and has some important insights here.
This Is How You Lose the Sex Wars
Trying to pick a pathway through forty years of the ugliest conflict in feminism.
This is a nice reflection and really highlights the complexities of reconciling seemingly very polarised perspectives. It’s possible, and I think a lot of people overthink it. But also very difficult especially with so much distraction (sometimes intentional, sometimes not) from larger systemic issues, and social contexts constantly in flux.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login